Notice of the Report on the Fishes of New York. 281 
Clupea elongata, (p. 250.)—We could have overlooked Dr. 
Dekay’s copying our description of the common herring of Mas- 
sachusetts, without giving us credit for the same, had he not un- 
fortunately transferred an error contained in said description into 
his pages. Instead of the eyes being ‘two diameters apart,” the 
distance between the eyes is less than the diameter of the eye. 
Alosa tyrannus, (p. 258.)—Our common alewive is here cata- 
logued under Latrobe’s specific name of tyrannus, although it is 
acknowledged to be “absurd and unmeaning,” because Peck’s 
prior name of serrata “is a mere name without any specific 
character, or clue to its identity.” Why is not Peck’s name as 
appropriate here as that of Pzmelodus catus? 'The specific char- 
acter is evidently indefinite in both—in neither more so, how- 
ever, than the name of tyrannus in this species ; and we are not 
a little surprised that the New York ichthyologist had not retain- 
ed the very acceptable and appropriate name of Dr. Mitchill, 
vernalis, for this species. 
Amia occidentalis, (p. 269.)—Why is not this species the Amia 
calva, described and figured by Kirtland in Vol. III, No. 41, of the 
Boston Journal of Natural History, published in Novenier 1840, 
as inhabiting Lake Erie? Its size is the same as that species; 
the number of its fin-rays differ but slightly. Dr. Dekay, it is 
true, while pointing out its characters, says ‘tail unspotted ;” 
but then he afterwards acknowledged, when speaking of the 
colors—‘I can say nothing, as I had only a dried specimen.” 
Lota inornata, (p. 283.)—I read a description of this species to 
this Society, April 21, 1841, under the name of Lota brosmiana ; 
that description, accompanied by a figure, appeared in your Jour- 
nal for January, 1842. 
Brosmius vulgaris, (p. 289.)—Dr. Dekay was right in doubt- 
ing the identity of the American cusk with the European species. 
I satisfied myself a long time since, that I had committed an error 
in my report. As our author has never seen a specimen of Le- 
sueur’s cusk, I would here point out its differences from the for- 
eign species. It is of a more elongated form; its dorsal and 
anal fins are united to the caudal fin; its eyes are oblong, and 
there is an immense difference in the number of their fin-rays. 
Dr. Dekay seems to have misunderstood my account of the color 
of this species. He says ‘the cusk of Storer, is uniform dark 
slate.”’ I described, as I here state, in my report, a specimen 
Vol. xiv, No. 2.—July-Sept. 1843. 36 
